Douglas Kronaizl

Welcome to Day 2 of our deep dive into this year’s spring elections, this time with a look at Oklahoma. ICYMI, check out yesterday’s report on Wisconsin.

In total, 556 of Oklahoma’s 2,366 school board seats, around 25%, were on the ballot.

The aim of this unique, comprehensive coverage is simple: to help close the “knowledge gap” about local races and candidates, and to encourage voter participation in the process.

Welcome to the Thursday, May 25, Brew. 

By: Douglas Kronaizl

This year we are covering every school board election in 10 states: Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Today, we’re looking at Oklahoma. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

1. Registered Republicans won 72% of seats, registered Democrats won 24%
2. State executives continue to endorse school board candidates
3. Nearly half of all incumbents in contested elections lost

Registered Republicans won 72% of school board seats, registered Democrats won 24%

There were 556 school board seats up for election in Oklahoma this year. After the April 4 election, registered Republicans won 401 seats (72%), registered Democrats with 131 (24%), and registered independents or minor party candidates won 24 (4%).

Oklahoma’s school board elections are officially nonpartisan, meaning candidates appear on the ballot without any party labels. But it is also one of 11 states that make its file of registered voters publicly available at no cost.

We used candidate filing information and other publicly-available data to match every school board candidate with a voter in the state’s voter file, giving us full partisan data across the state.

This comes with a few caveats. The most important: many people may register to vote with one party but later find themselves more aligned with another without officially switching their registration status. This means a registered Republican in this report might agree more with policies supported by the Democratic Party or vice versa.

Still, this level of research can provide additional insights into these school board elections, which tend to fly beneath the radar.

Here’s what we found once we crunched the data.

• There were 439 uncontested elections, representing 79.0% of all seats up for election. Oklahoma is unique in that uncontested elections are canceled, meaning they never appear on the ballot. For 425 of these seats, only one candidate ran. For the other 14, there was a contest in the February primaries, but one candidate won more than 50% of the vote, winning outright and canceling the April general election.

• 76 elections were intra-party, meaning they featured candidates registered with the same political party.

• Of the 556 seats up for election, 41 (7%) were contested between candidates registered with different political parties.

• Registered Republicans won 72% of all uncontested elections and 93% of all intra-party. Registered Democrats won 54% of all contested elections.

The chart below shows the overall total in terms of seats won by party registration status as well as breakdowns by the different categories of election types:

Voters in 110 districts (22% of those holding elections) elected only registered Democrats compared to those in 341 districts (70%) that elected only registered Republicans.

Voters in 18 districts (4%) elected candidates with different party affiliations, and voters in 21 districts (4%) elected only independents or minor party candidates.

Keep reading 

State executives continue to endorse school board candidates

Four state executive officials in Oklahoma endorsed school board candidates in this year’s elections, continuing what we first started to notice last year. These four officials endorsed three candidates in three races.

Gov. Kevin Stitt (R), Lt. Gov. Matt Pinnell (R), and Supt. of Public Instruction Ryan Walters (R) all endorsed Jared Buswell, who was challenging an incumbent in the Tulsa School District. Walters also endorsed Julie Bentley, who was running in the nearby Bixby School District. 

Commission of Labor Leslie Osborn (R) endorsed incumbent Judy Mullen Hopper in the Putnam School District.

Buswell and Bixby lost their respective elections. Mullen Hopper won.

Before last year, it was uncommon to see state executive officials weigh in on school board races. In summer 2022,  Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) endorsed a slate of school board candidates.

Additionally, we began to see candidates for state executive offices—like DeSantis’ opponent Charlie Crist (D) and Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Rebecca Kleefisch (R)—also issuing endorsements in school board races.

Now, officials in other states are following the 2022 example.

In Arkansas, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) recently endorsed two incumbents in a May school board election, both of whom lost.

And earlier this year in Illinois, Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) donated $500,000 to the state’s Democratic Party. According to the Daily Herald, these funds were meant to oppose candidates running for school board seats that “Democrats fear could be elected without much of a fight.”

Keep reading 

Nearly half of all incumbents in contested elections lost

The large number of uncontested elections—439, or 79%—meant there was less activity in Oklahoma’s school board elections than we typically see in other states.

That extends to the number of incumbents defeated. Overall, 447 incumbents ran for re-election (80%), of which 410 (92%) won and 37 (8%) lost.

That overall loss rate is well below the average of 16% we’ve seen across school board elections nationwide over the past five years. It’s also lower than the 11% loss rate we told you about in Wisconsin yesterday.

But 82% of those incumbents who ran for re-election were unopposed in the general election, more than double the 36% rate of unopposed incumbents we’ve usually seen.

When looking just at the 80 incumbents who ran in contested elections, the loss rate increases to 46%, 20 percentage points higher than the average contested loss rate for incumbents in our regular coverage scope.

Keep reading 

Today, we’re bringing you a special edition of the Brew. 

All 421 school districts in Wisconsin held at least one election on April 4. In total, 954 of the state’s 2,794 school board seats, around 35%, were on the ballot. Below, you’ll get an in-depth look at those results. In tomorrow’s edition, we’ll take a look at the school board results out of Oklahoma.

The aim of this unique, comprehensive coverage is simple: to help close the “knowledge gap” about local races and candidates, and to encourage voter participation in the process.

Welcome to the Wednesday, May 24, Brew. 

By: Douglas Kronaizl

This year we are covering every school board election in 10 states: Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Today, we’re kicking things off with Wisconsin. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

1. Top liberal endorsers had 73% win rate compared to 48% for top conservative groups
2. Open seats and incumbent defeats mirror historical averages
3. Union-endorsed candidates win governing majority in La Crosse

Top liberal endorsers had 73% win rate in school board races compared to 48% for top conservative groups

The top five liberal endorsers in Wisconsin had a win rate in school board elections of 73.2% compared to 47.5% among the state’s top five conservative endorsers.

As part of our school board coverage, we are gathering descriptive endorsements, those that help describe the stances or policy positions of a candidate. This is based on the assumption that endorsers tend to endorse candidates with whom they align.

Ballotpedia staff conducts outreach, recurring research, and asks candidates to find out who is endorsing whom. Once we find an endorsement, we tag them as either liberal or conservative based on whether they are affiliated with a major party or support education policies associated with a major party.

The top liberal endorsers in Wisconsin were:

• Local affiliates of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, a teacher’s union;
• The Wisconsin State AFL-CIO and its affiliates;
• The Democratic Party of Wisconsin and its affiliates;
• Blue Sky Waukesha, a group in Waukesha County; and
• Fair Wisconsin, an LGBTQ advocacy group.

The top conservative endorsers in Wisconsin were:

• The Republican Party of Wisconsin and its affiliates;
• Moms for Liberty and its affiliates;
• Get Involved Wisconsin, a voter mobilization group;
• 1776 Project PAC; and,
• WisRed PAC, a group in Waukesha County.

Among the liberal endorsers, all but Blue Sky Waukesha had win rates greater than 50%. 

For conservative endorsers, only WisRed PAC had a win rate greater than 50%.

All 10 endorsers made endorsements in uncontested races, where the endorsed candidate was guaranteed to win. For the state GOP and Moms for Liberty, those uncontested endorsements resulted in overall win rates greater than 50%.

But for the purposes of this analysis, only endorsements made in contested elections are included below:

While these 10 groups made a total of 627 endorsements, many of those endorsements overlapped within ideological lines. These endorsements all went to 286 candidates in 114 races, around 55% of all contested elections and 20% of all elections, overall.

Of those 286 candidates, 166 (58%) received endorsements from more than one of the top 10 endorsers.

Almost all of those candidates only received endorsements from either conservative or liberal endorsers. 

Two candidates—Noah Becker in the Green Bay School District and incumbent Robert Bohmann in the Muskego-Norway School District—received endorsements from both conservative and liberal endorsers.

• The GOP and AFL-CIO endorsed Becker; and,
• The GOP, Moms for Liberty, WisRed PAC, and Blue Sky Waukesha endorsed Bohmann.

Becker lost, but Bohmann won, making him the only candidate who received both conservative and liberal endorsements to win a school board seat.

Every school board election in Wisconsin is nonpartisan, meaning candidates appear on the ballot without any party labels.

Without those party labels, endorsements often serve as a way for voters to get an idea of who they support based on the groups or individuals supporting those candidates.

We are gathering endorsements for elections at all levels of government this year. But we could always use a helping hand. That’s why we’ve created a helpful form you can use to send us any endorsements you come across from individuals or organizations, large or small.

Keep reading 

Open seats and incumbent defeats mirror historical averages

Of the 954 school board seats up for election in Wisconsin, 690 incumbents (72%) ran for re-election, leaving 264 seats (28%) open. Open seats are guaranteed to newcomers.

Wisconsin’s open-seat rate is similar to what we typically see in our regular, nationwide school board coverage. The difference in Wisconsin is that slightly more incumbents ran for re-election than we’ve seen nationally. Between 2018 and 2022, an average of 71% of incumbents ran for re-election, leaving 29% of seats open.

Of the 690 incumbents who ran for re-election, 615 (89%) won, and 75 (11%) lost. Three incumbents lost in primaries held on Feb. 21, and the remaining 72 incumbents lost in the general election.

This overall loss rate was below average compared to the 16% loss rate we’ve seen nationwide over the last five years.

But this loss rate also only tells half the story. One reason so many incumbents won re-election is that 60% ran unopposed, guaranteeing their victory. This is almost double the 36% rate of unopposed incumbents we typically see nationwide for school board elections.

Only 278 incumbents faced challengers. When looking only at contested elections, the loss rate increases from 11% to 27%, mirroring the historical average of 26%.

Keep reading 

Union-endorsed candidates win governing majority in La Crosse

Now that we’ve given you the topline data, here’s a deep dive into the results of one specific school board. 

For the first time in at least 30 years, candidates who received endorsements from the La Crosse Education Association, a local affiliate of the nation’s largest teacher’s union, have a governing majority in the School District of La Crosse.

This district was one of 36 districts where every seat up for election was open, guaranteeing four newcomers to the nine-member board.

The two union-endorsed winners—Jeff Jackson and Trevor Sprague—join incumbents Katie Berkedal, Meredith Garcia, and Juan Jimenez, whom the union endorsed in last year’s elections. At that time, the endorsement was newsworthy since the union had not weighed in on any elections in several decades.

La Crosse is the county seat of La Crosse County, a Solid Democratic county in the state, which has supported Democratic candidates for president in each of the past three elections.

Along with Jackson and Sprague, voters elected Scott Neumeister and Deb Suchla to the board. Both candidates received endorsements from conservative organizations, including the county Republican Party.

Both candidates also received endorsements from the 1776 Project PAC. According to the group’s website, it is an organization “dedicated to electing school board members nationwide who want to reform our public education system by promoting patriotism and pride in American history.”

Keep reading 

Welcome to the Monday, May 8, Brew. 

Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

1. Pennsylvania Democrats, Republicans to pick state supreme court nominees on May 16
2. SCOTUS to hear case challenging Chevron deference
3. Eleven election-related bills enacted this past week

Pennsylvania Democrats, Republicans to pick state supreme court nominees on May 16

On May 16, Democratic and Republican voters in Pennsylvania will make their picks for the state’s upcoming supreme court election in November.

These upcoming primaries will determine the major party candidates running to fill a vacancy on the court created after Chief Justice Max Baer (D) died last year. The winner in November will be elected to a 10-year term on the court.

Democrats have controlled the Pennsylvania Supreme Court since 2015 when they established a 5-2 majority. Today, with Baer’s vacancy, the makeup is a 4-2 Democratic majority.

The outcome of this election will not affect the court’s governing majority. But it will set the stage for the upcoming 2025 elections when three justice’s terms—all Democrats—are set to expire.

If Democrats retain the vacant seat this year, Republicans would need to win at least two of the three seats in 2025 to gain a majority. If Republicans win this year, they would only need to win one seat in 2025.

Spotlight PA’s Kate Huangpu wrote, “The state Supreme Court takes on relatively few cases, but its rulings can have a major impact on politics and policy in Pennsylvania. In recent years, the court has decided cases on reproductive rights, mask mandates, and election disputes.”

Both of this year’s primaries have two candidates.

Deborah Kunselman and Daniel McCaffery, both judges on the Pennsylvania Superior Court, are running in the Democratic primary.

In a Candidate Connection survey submitted to Ballotpedia, Kunselman said, “I believe in equal access to justice and transparency in our court system … regardless of income, race, gender, national origin, age, religion or sexual orientation.”

Kunselman received endorsements from #VoteProChoice and the Pennsylvania Working Families Party.

In a questionnaire submitted to the Pennsylvania Bar Association, McCaffery said, “Democratic Institutions including the judiciary are under duress … [M]y priority will be to approach every case in a non-partisan manner … to restore faith in the judicial branch.”

McCaffery received endorsements from the Pennsylvania Democratic Party and the Pennsylvania Conference of Teamsters.

Patricia McCullough and Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio are running in the Republican primary. McCullough is a judge on the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. Carluccio is a judge on Montgomery County’s Court of Common Pleas.

On her campaign website, McCullough said her “character, wisdom and temperament make her the People’s Judge” and that she is “[n]ever willing to compromise justice … stands for election integrity,” and is a “courageous, strict constitutionalist judge.”

McCullough received endorsements from state Sen. and 2022 gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano (R) and the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation.

In a Candidate Connection survey submitted to Ballotpedia, Carluccio said, “I am impartial and apply the law as it is written. I will not legislate from the bench … I ensure that everyone is treated with dignity and respect when they come before me.”

Carluccio received endorsements from the Pennsylvania Republican Party and the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry.

Pennsylvania is one of eight states that use partisan elections for state supreme court justices. And it’s one of two states holding supreme court elections this year. Wisconsin voters elected a new justice on April 4.

Keep reading 

SCOTUS to hear case challenging Chevron deference

On May 1, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a case that could curb or clarify future applications of Chevron deference in federal courts.

Chevron deference is an administrative law principle courts have cited in thousands of opinions since 1984. 

Under this principle, if federal law is unclear or doesn’t address a specific issue, the agency responsible for its implementation can interpret the law and create rules to fill the gaps. If a court finds the agency’s interpretation reasonable, it will accept the agency’s view rather than replace it with its own interpretation.

Supporters of Chevron deference say it prioritizes agency expertise, while opponents say it prevents judges from exercising their constitutional duty to interpret the law independently. 

In recent years, inconsistent applications of Chevron deference have led some scholars and judicial commentators to question the doctrine’s longevity and anticipate rulings limiting its scope.

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo centers around a group of commercial fishermen. In this case, a lower court applied Chevron deference to uphold an agency interpretation of a federal fishery law requiring the fishermen to pay for compliance monitors.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Petitioners asked the court to decide whether it should overturn Chevron or at least clarify when and how Chevron should be applied.

Any adjustments to Chevron deference could affect the doctrine’s future application by federal courts in cases relating to administrative law.

If you want to learn more, Ballotpedia has you covered with all the info on Chevron deference, compiled as part of our Administrative State Project. This research contains everything from the legal history of the original case to the present day, as well as federal and state applications of the doctrine, arguments for and against it, and much more!

Keep reading 

Eleven election-related bills enacted this past week

State legislators enacted 11 new election-related bills over the past week, including:

• Senate Bill 259 in Michigan, which changes the state’s absentee/mail-in voting deadline from received by Election Day to postmarked by Election Day. Voters now have to place their ballots in the mail no later than the election rather than have them delivered to election officials by that time;
• House Bill 598 in Montana, prohibiting the use of ranked-choice voting in federal, state, or local elections; and, 
• Senate Bill 410 in Oklahoma, which modifies the list of activities prohibited near polling places. It bars any person other than election officials or those voting from remaining in or near a polling place, including exit pollsters.

In addition to these three newly-enacted bills, 57 other bills have moved further along in the legislative process over the past week: 14 passed both chambers and are awaiting final approval, and 43 passed one chamber, moving on to the next.

As of May 4, legislators across the country have enacted 116 election-related bills this year, roughly the same as the 113 such bills enacted at this point in 2022.

Of this year’s 116 enacted bills, Republicans sponsored 63, or 56%, up from 50% of the total enacted at this point last year. Democrats sponsored 16%, down from 21% in 2022. Bills with bipartisan sponsorship make up 14% of the total enacted, down from 19% last year. Those with unclear partisan sponsorship are up to 14% from 10% in 2022.

You can view a full list of enacted bills this year here.

To stay up-to-date with the latest news in election-related legislation, subscribe to The Ballot Bulletin, our weekly newsletter—dropping every Friday afternoon—that delivers the latest updates on election policy. Every week, we track legislative activity, big-picture trends, recent news, and in-depth data from our Election Administration Legislation Tracker.

Keep reading 

Welcome to the Wednesday, May 3, Brew. 

Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

1. Texas Senate advances amendments regarding relationship between parents, children, and educators
2. How 2023’s recall efforts stack up to previous years
3. Biden ends April with 43% approval rating, same as last month

Texas Senate advances amendments regarding relationship between parents, children, and educators

Texas voters may decide two constitutional amendments regarding the relationship between parents, children, and educators come November.

The Texas Senate recently approved Senate Joint Resolutions 29 (SJR 29) and 70 (SJR 70), described by proponents as parental rights amendments, which are now pending before the House. If approved, they will appear on the November ballot.

Proposed amendments must receive a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber before heading to the ballot for a public vote. That equals 21 votes in the Senate.

• SJR 29 would establish a state constitutional right for parents to direct their children’s education, access public school teaching materials, attend school board meetings, and access the child’s student health records.
  • The Republican Party of Texas, Texas Home School Coalition, and Texas Private Schools Association support the amendment.
  • The Texas NAACP, Texas State Teachers Association, and Texas AFL-CIO oppose it.
  • SJR 29 passed the Senate 21-10, with two Democrats joining 19 Republicans to clear the two-thirds threshold required for approval of constitutional amendments. 

• SJR 70 would establish a state constitutional right for parents to exercise care, control, and custody of their child, including decisions regarding education, moral and religious training, and healthcare.
  • Sen. Bryan Hughes (R), the amendment’s sponsor, said SJR 70 would “ensure the longevity of these rights by taking them from case law, which can change … at any time, and adding them to the Texas Constitution.”
  • The Texas Parent-Teacher Association opposes the amendment.
  • SJR 70 passed 28-3, with all but three Democrats voting in favor.

Republicans control both chambers, but not with veto-proof majorities. This means any proposed constitutional amendment must also receive support from Democrats.

This means in the House, where an amendment needs 100 votes to pass, at least 14 Democrats must join the chamber’s 86 Republicans in order to place these amendments on the November ballot.

Officials have not yet scheduled the next steps for these proposals, but they will move to a House committee before facing a full floor vote. The legislative session ends on May 29.

In 1996, voters in Colorado rejected an amendment that would have specified “that parents have the right to direct and control the upbringing, education, values, and discipline of their children.” The measure failed 58% to 42%.

Keep reading

How 2023’s recall efforts stack up to previous years

With four full months down in 2023, we have identified 149 recall efforts nationwide.

We will be bringing you our mid-year recall report in June, but here’s a sneak peek at where things stand right now compared to recent years.

With 149 recall efforts, this year is already outpacing the total number of recall efforts we identified at the mid-year points in 2019 and 2020. But our current year-to-date total is still lower than where things stood halfway through 2021 and 2022, the two most-active years for recalls in more than a decade.

In terms of who voters are trying to recall this year, there has been a greater focus on city officials—like mayors and city councilors—who make up 70% (104) of all recall efforts so far.

Since 2019, city officials have tended to be the primary focus of most recall efforts. That changed in 2021 when school board members made up the most recall efforts at the mid-year point at 48% (126). The following year, school board recall efforts remained elevated, but 2023 has a more typical rate of school board recall efforts at 21% (32).

Around 62% of this year’s recall efforts are still pending, meaning organizers are either gathering signatures to place a recall on the ballot (76) or officials have scheduled a recall for an upcoming election (17). These totals are all fairly common compared to the mid-year point in recent years.

But, by the end of the year, most recall efforts typically fail to make the ballot. Between 2019 and 2023, more than half of every effort initiated failed to qualify. This is often because recall supporters failed to gather the required number of signatures in time.

It’s not uncommon for officeholders who are facing recall efforts to resign ahead of time. That’s already happened six times this year but ultimately tends to account for anywhere between 3% and 6% of all recall efforts in a given year.

Only 6% of this year’s recall efforts (9) have been decided. That’s somewhat similar to the 8% (21) that had already gone to a vote halfway through 2021 but much lower than what we’ve seen in other recent years as of June 1, which have ranged from 15% to 25%.

Of the nine recalls that have already taken place this year, voters approved 89%, removing eight people from office. This is a comparatively high approval percentage compared to recent years but from a smaller sample, one that may increase as more recalls make it onto the ballot

While 2021 was the most-active year in terms of the total number of recall efforts initiated, voters approved only 43% of those that made the ballot by the mid-year point. Similar to this year, in 2019 and 2022, voters had approved a majority of recalls at this point.

Click on the link below to learn more about every recall effort Ballotpedia has identified to date.

Keep reading 

Biden ends April with 43% approval rating, same as last month

At the end of April, polling averages showed President Joe Biden (D) with a 43% approval rating. Fifty-three percent of voters disapproved of his performance.

At 43%, Biden’s approval rating at the end of the month remains unchanged from the end of March.

Biden’s lowest approval rating was 38% on July 27, 2022. His highest was 55% on May 26, 2021.

Congressional approval ratings fluctuated between 26% and 33% throughout April, ending at 28%, the same rating at the end of March.

The lowest approval rating for the 118th Congress, which began last January, was 21% on Jan. 18. Its highest approval rating was 33% on April 20 and 21.

At this point in former President Donald Trump’s (R) administration, presidential approval was also at 43%, and congressional approval was seven points lower at 21%.

We calculate these approval figures every weekday by taking an average of polls conducted over the preceding 30 days. In addition to the average, we show every poll included in our calculations side-by-side to paint a clearer picture of public opinion than one individual poll can provide.

Keep reading

Welcome to the Monday, May 1, Brew. 

Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

1. San Antonio voters to decide measure on abortion, marijuana, policing
2. New York adopts new state Assembly lines
3. Number of enacted election-related bills on par with 2022

Goodbye, April showers, time for some May flowers! 

San Antonio voters to decide measure on abortion, marijuana, policing

Voters in San Antonio will decide on a charter amendment regarding abortion, marijuana, and police actions on May 6.

If approved, Proposition A would:

• Prohibit local police from enforcing criminal abortion laws;
• Decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana;
• Ban the use of no-knock warrants and chokeholds; 
• Direct local police to issue citations instead of arrests for certain other misdemeanors; and,
• Establish a city justice director appointed by the mayor and city council.

Before we dive into the measure, I asked our Ballots Managing Editor, Ryan Byrne, about this amendment. Byrne said, “We’ve heard about cities decriminalizing marijuana in states where it’s illegal, but this is the first measure that attempts to decriminalize abortion at the local level.”

In 2022, residents in six Texas cities—Austin, Denton, Elgin, Harker Heights, Killeen, and San Marcos—voted in favor of decriminalizing marijuana possession. The Austin measure also banned law enforcement’s use of no-knock warrants.

Ground Game Texas, an organization supporting Proposition A, says the San Antonio measure is the first time any voters in Texas will decide on a measure regarding abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision last summer.

The Texas Tribune’s Patrick Svitek wrote, “For more than a year, progressive organizers in Texas have been waging a concerted — and largely successful — effort to convince voters to reform policing laws in their cities, pushing the envelope of what state law could allow.”

Svitek continued, “But now they are facing their biggest test yet in San Antonio,” where Proposition A “could spark the biggest showdown yet with the Republican-dominated state government.”

Texas state law prohibits all abortions except those needed to save the life of or prevent serious risk to the mother. Texas also prohibits both medicinal and recreational marijuana. 

The San Antonio Police Department has prohibited the use of chokeholds and no-knock warrants since 2014 and 2020, respectively, except for cases where responding officers determine an imminent threat to life. These are departmental policies rather than codified laws.

In addition to Ground Game Texas, supporters of Proposition A include the Bexar County Democratic Party, the San Antonio AFL-CIO, and Act4SA, which said Proposition A “reduces burden on officers, prevents unnecessary arrests for nonviolent low level crimes … [and] pushes police accountability.”

Opponents of Proposition A include the Bexar County Republican Party, the Texas Alliance For Life, and the San Antonio Police Officers Association. 

Arguments against the proposition have focused primarily on the increased issuance of citations rather than the abortion or marijuana aspects. Danny Diaz, the city’s police union president, said, “We won’t be able to arrest and do our job … They’re talking about … rehabilitating criminals … but the businesses are the ones that are going to suffer.”

If approved, Proposition A will likely face legal challenges. The Texas Alliance For Life filed a lawsuit alleging the measure illegally addresses multiple subjects. The Texas Supreme Court ruled against the group in March, saying the measure could remain on the ballot but that voters retain legal avenues to challenge the measure after the election.

Keep reading 

New York adopts new state Assembly district lines

Did you think redistricting was done? Think again!

On April 24, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed legislation enacting new State Assembly boundaries for use starting in the 2024 elections.

And the redistricting fun isn’t over yet! Texas is actively working on new state legislative maps ahead of the 2024 election. And North Carolina will also redraw the legislative and congressional maps it used in 2022 following a recent state supreme court decision.

South Carolina has an active lawsuit regarding their congressional maps. And Ohio will need to redraw both its congressional and state legislative maps ahead of the 2026 elections due to provisions in its state constitution. Learn more here.

In New York, the state’s Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) voted 9-1 on April 20 to advance the new Assembly map to the legislature for final approval. The Assembly voted 132-13 in favor, and the Senate voted 59-1 in favor of the new districts.

The new maps replace a previous set invalidated by a 2022 court decision in Nichols v. Hochul. The lawsuit alleged the state failed to follow constitutional procedures during its initial drafting process. 

Due to the timing of the lawsuit, the state used the initial maps in 2022, under which Democrats won in 102 districts and Republicans won in 48.

The magnitude of this change may be limited. Gothamist’s Giulia Heyward and Jon Campbell wrote that the new maps are roughly identical to the invalidated lines approved in 2022.

New York State of Politics’ Kate Lisa wrote that the court ruled “the Assembly maps were invalid because the Legislature drew its own lines after the state Independent Redistricting Commission failed to propose a second set of maps.”

In January 2022, the IRC voted 5-5 to submit two sets of maps to the legislature. Legislators voted against both proposals, after which they produced their own lines. 

Courts previously invalidated the state’s congressional and senate maps, but in both cases, new lines were in place in time for the 2022 elections.

Keep reading 

Number of enacted election-related bills on par with 2022

As of April 27, legislators across the country have enacted 86 election-related bills this year, up from 83 such bills at this point in 2022.

Of this year’s 86 enacted bills, Republicans sponsored 47, or 55%, up from 49% of the total enacted at this point last year. Democrats sponsored 19%, up from 18% in 2022. Bills with bipartisan sponsorship remain at 19% of the total enacted, the same as last year. Those with unclear partisan sponsorship are down to 8% from 13% in 2022.

The 2023 totals include five new bills enacted over the past week, all in Maryland, which has a Democratic trifecta. Here are a few of those bills:

• House Bill 410 requires local elections boards to hold public meetings before voting to change polling place locations, adds things like fraud, threat, and bribery to the list of ways you cannot influence voters’ decisions, and changes certain procedures relating to election custodians.

• House Bill 379 directs local elections boards to begin processing and counting absentee ballots eight days before the first day of early voting. It also requires that boards notify a voter within three days if an absentee ballot is missing a signature and give them the chance to fix it.

• Senate Bill 863 changes the requirements for the State Administrator of Elections to be removed and that the Administrator serve until a successor is appointed.

In addition to these five newly-enacted bills, 38 other bills have moved further along in the legislative process over the past week: 18 passed both chambers and are awaiting final approval, and 20 passed one chamber, moving on to the next.

You can view a full list of enacted bills this year here. To stay up-to-date with the latest news in election-related legislation, subscribe to The Ballot Bulletin, our weekly newsletter—dropping every Friday afternoon—that delivers the latest updates on election policy. Every week, we track legislative activity, big-picture trends, recent news, and in-depth data from our Election Administration Legislation Tracker.

Keep reading